Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    OP started off so strong, but has been completely destroyed within this thread. Never see such a finish.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Islamophobia is a collective term which means fear/hating Islam OR Muslims. Not 'and'. :facepalm:
    exactly

    Islamophobia (in general language) is a hammer used to hit on the head not only those who discriminate against Muslims, but also those who oppose Islam

    once again : you can oppose, fear or even hate Islam, without opposing, fearing or hating Muslims in general (but only those who interpret it and act in a hateful, violent manner)

    discriminating against Muslims is wrong ; opposing Islam is perfectly OK, and even commendable

    best
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    exactly

    Islamophobia (in general language) is a hammer used to hit on the head not only those who discriminate against Muslims, but also those who oppose Islam

    once again : you can oppose, fear or even hate Islam, without opposing, fearing or hating Muslims in general (but only those who interpret it and act in a hateful, violent manner)

    discriminating against Muslims is wrong ; opposing Islam is perfectly OK, and even commendable

    best
    Wrong. Islamophobia is someone who hates/fears Islam or Muslims

    Get the 'or' into your head. Islamophobia is not haters of Islam and Muslims, its haters of either of them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jibola240)
    OP started off so strong, but has been completely destroyed within this thread. Never see such a finish.
    Well contrary to his point about his OP receiving more reps than the first counter post, the majority of people actually posting has been against him.

    Poor lad. And all he wanted to be was a social warrior fighting for justice. Fighting for a better world. Amen.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    And I've read the Quran, and all I can gather from it is either we live in a world of 1.6 billion poor followers of Islam, or the excessively vast majority of followers have ignored the violent parts and have made their religion compatible with the 21st century in their respective communities.
    Those are essentially the same thing, and is a welcome step forward.
    However, as far as the literalist, retentionists are concerned, they are no longer Muslims. They are apostates or munafiq, and the punishment is death. This kind of extremist fundamentalism existed before ISIS, and will continue to exist after they have gone. Because it is enshrined in the Quran and sunnah. And all Muslims (even the ones who claim to condemn ISIS) still claim that the Quran is pefect and immutable, and Muhammad's example the best role model. And until that logical disconnect continues, groups like ISIS will continue to get their legitimacy from the wider Muslim community, albeit unwittingly.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    And if you're worried about x% of Muslims thinking that homosexuality should be outlawed, that's their way of life.
    So if an atheist thinks that Islam should be outlawed, you will defent that position because it's their "way of life"? Of course you won't. You've just spent days calling anyone who criticised Islam a bigot, yet you defend blatant (and scriptually violent) homophobia as "just a way of life".
    You have been well and truly rekt.

    And I have no doubt that stabbing two Muslims outside a mosque is an Islamophobic attack, there's no point in denying it -
    Hold on! You claim that people who commit attacks that they themselves claim are in the name of and justified by, a particular religion have nothing to do with that religion.

    Yet now, you are insisting that the as-yet motiveless shooting is entirely motivated and justified by religion. Despite there being long-standing racial and social tensions between the Latino and Asian communities in the area?

    otherwise they would have stabbed two completely random people.
    What? How do you know that they weren't random? I mean, how unlikely is it that two people, outside a mosque, in an area with a large Bangaldeshi population, would be Muslims?
    It's a bit like saying that two middle-aged white people, ouside a church, in Gibraltar, are unlikely to be Christian.

    Dat logic again.

    Nobody knows the motive or justification yet, so you having "no doubt " that it is Islamophobic is no less guess work that when a Muslim shouting "Allahu akbar" before killing some people is an Islamist attack.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Lol what? I never compared the IRA to ISIS, I just said that they would deploy bombs instead of sending suicide attackers, LIKE the IRA.

    Secondly, in contrary to your point, ISIS want a caliphate of all Muslims, so your point there isn't strong.

    The Quran also forbids aggressive warfare, forbids killing female/child hostages, forbids using terror for political gain. ISIS do all of these, so your point is also refuted there.

    They were not motivated by religion, take case studies of any modern terror attacker, and a 'heart-filled desire to help Islam' is never in their biography. They always do it because their lives go south and their hateful feelings which derive from this misery are concentrated by radical groups like ISIS.
    Without religion they may plant bombs, but they'd be less inclined to. You can't just state hypotheticals as fact.

    ISIS wants a caliphate of all Muslims by force, either subscribe to Salafism or die. That's how they plan to achieve it, and that's what they've done to areas under control (unlike al-Nusra, who don't enforce their beliefs short term).

    The Koran doesn't forbid any of these because non-Muslims, infidels, kuffars etc. Don't count as humans according to Islamic belief. In fact, the Koran explicitly states that it is okay to cut off the hands of thiefs, behead non believers, and oppress women. Muhammad also had an 8 year old wife, yet Muslims are ordered to follow in his footsteps.

    Obviously, but the fact of the matter is there are plenty of disaffected young men, but seemingly only the Muslim one's murder civilians in the name of God.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Racist feelings are legitimised when you have a person in power indirectly promoting racism. It doesn't mean that racism is born into existence by the presence of this person, it means that it is amplified.

    Problems caused by natives = shootings, stabbings, rape, theft, etc - all of which are done in greater number by the natives than with the immigrants. Its fundamentally bigoted to complain about the proportion of migrants causing it when our own race causes the very same problems in mass.

    "Sharia Law" is a meaningless term. Nowhere is it written in stone that sharia law = hand chopping and throwing gays off roofs. Furthermore 1.6 billion Muslims are evidently non-violent, the fact that a government has violent laws put forward does not mean all Muslims are violent.

    Boko haram membership is less than 10,000, Hamas is around 15,000. ISIS have a minimum of 50,000 members and up to 250,000. Try again.
    1. Racist feelings are NOT legitimised when you have a person in power! Where are you getting this from? The key word is that this is still a person - biologically the same as me and you, and in this particular case, Trump has no real power to legitimise anything. He is not the president. Is he actively trying to make racism legal? No is the answer there. You yourself say that he is doing this ''indirectly'', meaning that a) this is your interpretation of what he is trying to do b) you have no proof he is promoting anything racist and are just using his reputation for the gains of your argument.
    2. Sharia Law is not a meaningless term, as Muslims themselves use it to represent their way of life (usually more violent and prevalent in the Middle East)
    3. It would be useful to provide sources where you get your numbers from concerning membership. ISIS does not nearly have 250k members! The more frequently found number is 25k, which does not put it significantly higher than Hamas or Boko Haram. And in this case, numbers are not everything, since we are talking about their power of influence, which is not relative to the amount of members rather influential leaders and manipulators.
    4. You may deny Sharia Law's solidness, but you cannot deny its existence. Stoning is prevalent and common, and women have less rights - eg: not being able to drive, etc.
    5. How do you know that 1.6billion Muslims are non-violent? Where has this figure come from? If there are no rebellions against this aforementioned way of life, and the mass of people live in these countries where the law is indirectly enforced then I think your large figure will be significantly reduced. I also see minimal shock and condemnation by your 1.6billion peaceful Muslims speaking against Sharia Law and stoning on either the news, through protests, etc.
    6. I have so far heard no such cases happening in the UK: no rapings, no shootings, nothing! It is perhaps the other way around, where in France and Germany and other parts of the EU ( and America, even) the high amounts of refugees taken in this year and earlier have committed massacres and stabbings(I'm sure you know that these DO exist).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Boko haram membership is less than 10,000, Hamas is around 15,000. ISIS have a minimum of 50,000 members and up to 250,000. Try again.
    You just cited a survey that showed only 7% of Muslims who thought suicide bombings are definitely justified.
    That's 112 million Muslims who approve of suicide bombings! That's twice the population of the UK, FFS!!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    You can link any poll you want, but discriminating against people because of their beliefs fundamentally goes against democracy.
    Absolutely.
    And Muslims tend to be more discriminatory in their beliefs (and actions, when they are in a majority) than all us bigoted atheists with our unjustified and unnecessary condemnation of slavery, domestic violence, gender inequality, persecution of gays and apostates, stoning adulterers, etc, etc.

    You do know that Islam calls for the death of people because of their beliefs, not just discrimination? And while I know that most Muslims do not act on such calls, they still claim that they are perfect and immutable, thus providing legitimacy for those who do act on them. And by defending their position, you are also adding tacit support to Islamist extremists.

    And you probably don't even realise that you're doing it.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Wrong. Islamophobia is someone who hates/fears Islam or Muslims

    Get the 'or' into your head. Islamophobia is not haters of Islam and Muslims, its haters of either of them.
    why ? because you say so ?

    again : hating Islam is perfectly OK

    hating Muslims in general is not

    what constitutes exactly "Islamophobia" is irrelevant : technically, it means "fear of Islam", but in practice, it means whatever people who use this fuzzy concept want

    best
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Secondly, in contrary to your point, ISIS want a caliphate of all Muslims, so your point there isn't strong..
    But you keep claiming that ISIS's actions have nothing to do with Islam.
    Now you are claiming that their aim is the creation of an Islamic theocracy.
    Durr.

    The Quran also forbids aggressive warfare,
    Why are you repeating this nonsense when you have been clearly shown that it does not forbid it?

    forbids killing female/child hostages,
    Ah, have you been looking at that naughty "Islamic rules of warfare" meme? It's mostly *******, you know. Muhammad ordered the killing of at least one female prisoner (see Banu Qurayza), and "child" is relative. The Islamic definition of a child is someone who has not started puberty, so there can be "adults" as young as 9 or 10.
    During the slaughter of the surrendered Banu Qurayza, Muhammad had his men check the boys for pubic hair. If they had any, they were beheaded along with the men (who had all surrendered on the condition that they would be treated leniently, don't forget).

    That list also states that even trees may not be harmed, yet during the siege of the Banu Nadir Muhammad had the tribes date palm cut down and burned as a means of demoralising the besieged tribe. (Date palms were considered as amongst a communities most valuable possessions).

    forbids using terror for political gain.
    So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson. - Quran 8:57

    "I have been made victorious through terror" - Sahih Bukhari

    And the burning of the Banu Nadir's date palms, of course.

    ISIS do all of these, so your point is also refuted there.
    And they do all these things (and more, like the slavery, sex slaves, torture, etc) because it is all justified by a passage from the Quran or sunnah.

    They were not motivated by religion, take case studies of any modern terror attacker, and a 'heart-filled desire to help Islam' is never in their biography. They always do it because their lives go south and their hateful feelings which derive from this misery are concentrated by radical groups like ISIS
    And yet, any case where such things are known show clear end explicit motivation and justification from withing the Quran and sunnah. It is not the only factor, but it is a clear and important one.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Like many privileged, white, teenage, SJWs he displays a kind of ironic racism. He thinks that criticising Islam is attacking Muslims, and because he thinks that all Muslims are Brown Foreigners, they deed defending from the nasty white folk who are attacking them.
    I find it simply disgusting and a disgrace that he thinks it's ok for Muslims to have backward views. He would do great in a Middle Eastern country and he can't back himself up in his arguments.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Racism and Islamophobia tend to come together. Regardless of whether Islam is a race or not, its still religious discrimination and bigotry.
    So, are you claiming that being anti-Islam is racist, or not. You seem confused (how unusual!)

    take ANY case study of terrorism in the last 3 years in Europe, and almost all of them do it for political gain and not to help Islam
    So, if we look at ANY example of terrorism in Europe over the last 3 years, we will fing no implied of explicit religious justification?
    :rofl:
    Do you really believe this nonsense?

    OK. Pick three, and we will examine them.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So, are you claiming that being anti-Islam is racist, or not. You seem confused (how unusual!)

    So, if we look at ANY example of terrorism in Europe over the last 3 years, we will fing no implied of explicit religious justification?
    :rofl:
    Do you really believe this nonsense?

    OK. Pick three, and we will examine them.
    Pretty sure the terrorists in France shouted "Allahu Akbar" for the bants because they were too lazy to say "Anjem Choudary rules OK"



    What a disgusting comment. It has everything to do with religion.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Is hating a religion or an ideology equivalent to hating its followers ? I don't think so.

    E.g., I hate Scientology : I think it is a fraud, which has harmed thousands of people, and deserves no respect at all

    At the same time, most Scientologists are just normal people, largely the victims of the religion itself and of its leaders, and there is no reason at all to hate (or fear, or discriminate etc) them

    "Islamophobia" is a murky concept, which equates fearing (or hating) the religion with fearing (or hating, or discriminating) its followers

    for this reason, when confronted with this concept, we should always point out its ambiguity, which is not innocent of course

    best
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    You've misinterpreted me. People who are racist are very often Islamophobic as well.
    But they are two different things. I happily accept that I fit part of the OED definition of "Islamophobe"...
    Dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.
    I am, in no way, racist...
    Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior:

    And I think Sadiq Khan being the mayor of London is a direct contradiction to your theory of Islam being inseparable between politics and religion.
    How does a Muslim being elected to political office disprove the connection between Islam and politics?

    Do you realise that in a true Islamic caliphate, the political system is entirely derived from the Quran ans sunnah? Did you know that the constitution of Saudi Arabia is the Quran and sunnah!

    You bin dun agen.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    I find it simply disgusting and a disgrace that he thinks it's ok for Muslims to have backward views. He would do great in a Middle Eastern country and he can't back himself up in his arguments.
    actually, we owe it to our Muslim friends and co-citizens to point out the obvious flaws in Islam and the problems it causes when implemented in societies

    we should never forget that Muslims are actually the first (and most numerous) victims of Islam
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Islamophobia is a collective term which means fear/hating Islam OR Muslims. Not 'and'. :facepalm:
    And yet, you constantly imply that any critic of Islam is an Islamophobe and bigot.
    I agree that hating Muslims is wrong.
    Disliking Islam (OED definition) is entirely justified.
    You yourself have stated that you dislike Islam.
    Therefore you are as Islamophobic as I am.

    You also think that all Muslims are Brown Foreigners. Such an assumption can only come from a slightly racist view of different cultures.
    I understand that Muslims can be any race, colour or nationality.
    Now who's the bigot?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Absolutely.
    And Muslims tend to be more discriminatory in their beliefs (and actions, when they are in a majority) than all us bigoted atheists with our unjustified and unnecessary condemnation of slavery, domestic violence, gender inequality, persecution of gays and apostates, stoning adulterers, etc, etc.

    You do know that Islam calls for the death of people because of their beliefs, not just discrimination? And while I know that most Muslims do not act on such calls, they still claim that they are perfect and immutable, thus providing legitimacy for those who do act on them. And by defending their position, you are also adding tacit support to Islamist extremists.

    And you probably don't even realise that you're doing it.
    I'm not an atheist but dayumm... +1
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.